Thread Tools
Posts: 2,802 | Thanked: 4,489 times | Joined on Nov 2007
That report is a bit... strange. For example, I don't understand why the Linux kernel governance is judged based on the Linux Foundation or why it gets low access & development scores that are not explained in the text, other than the obvious anti-copyleft bias.

The MeeGo section especially is hopelessly uninformed and out of date, not to mention the Symbian one.
Posts: 2,802 | Thanked: 4,489 times | Joined on Nov 2007
Originally Posted by Frappacino View Post
go outside, feel the sun and talk to normal people sometimes - you know, people who are too busy with real life to argue back and forth on a forum about some abstract philosophical ideal

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to lma For This Useful Post:
Posts: 1,523 | Thanked: 1,997 times | Joined on Jul 2011 @ not your mom's FOSS basement
Originally Posted by Frappacino View Post
how many android phone buyers buy it because it is "open" ?

come on - who gives a flying **** for "openness" except for people who "believe" ?

go outside, feel the sun and talk to normal people sometimes - you know, people who are too busy with real life to argue back and forth on a forum about some abstract philosophical ideal

open or not open - life goes on - M$ OS has been on desktop for years and people use it day in and day out without the world ending

only relevant point is whether lawsuits will further hinder android as a whole
Of course yo uare right in that regard: Just a small group of people, sadly.

Actually, i think i'm a bit "busy with life" too, having a job where some travelling is a must and have to take care about things and customers worldwide, my girlfriend lives in another city, going for events/parties in neighbouring countries, having multiple interests... But i still have enough time having a deeper look... ok, technology in general is one of my biggest interests.


Most people are... sheep. Just sheep. Dump sheep, often. They do not know better, most do not want to know better, They do what ever they found out until they die, and often do review how they "do".

They just acqure what corporate and/or store marketing wants to sell them. They do not research what's out there, ranging from cars to cellphones to trips / countries, books, to music, evrything even if their life would allow that. They just accept what somebody recommends them, they want the "easy" way, the mainstream one. And they are quite happy in their own little (ok actually its the majority share of the) world).

DISCLAIMER: I started to pay more for people / companies to provide me with stuff so that it "just works" too, being having less time for everything, but i still friggin' *KNOW* what i want and need, from my own insights so they better provide me with stuff or services according to my requirements, and not some generic mainstream consumer ****.

They just want not to be bothered with technical stuff, and want stuff that just "works". That's why Apple's so successful in selling their overpriced mainstream iCrap / carrier restricted Droids that only provides slight devation from the general corporate vision of how one should do things / which things are allowed, MS is the second corporation that exhibits the same on their customers.

Actually, most only want simple things in life. And i find myself quite often in a situation where i actually want to avoid such "simpletons' / somehow "superficial" type of persons that do not want to bother with technology, politics, "taking a look behind / being curious" and just want to live their 9-5 lives with "two kids" and two cards, a house" if they are older, and just having fun while being younger. I like people that ask questions, that are not afraid to stir up controversies, that like being politically incorrect, that do not simply "follow", that do they own "research", that do not readily / willingly comply to (western) corporate standards. This takes energy and time, i know.

In the end, it's probably a huge degree being a matter of priorities. Ok, i'm off to MIT museum...

PS.: I'm neither on Facebook nor G+, too.

Last edited by don_falcone; 2011-08-06 at 14:16.

The Following User Says Thank You to don_falcone For This Useful Post:
Capt'n Corrupt's Avatar
Posts: 3,524 | Thanked: 2,958 times | Joined on Oct 2007 @ Delta Quadrant
Originally Posted by daperl View Post
Yeah, looks quite bad and overly complex to me:

#include <QtGui>

int main(int argc, char *argv[])
    QApplication app(argc, argv);

    QMainWindow mainWindow;
    QLabel label("hello world",&mainWindow);;

    return app.exec();
Spreading FUD from ignorance isn't a very thoughtful sentiment.

We could spoon feed you, but then we'd have to kill you.
Oh, daperl....

How does a window instantiation speak anything about the complexity of a producing a functional UI?

Some of the showcase examples on the QT site list a significant amount of components, which would require quite a bit of experience to use comfortably.

Trying to help me understand what the attraction is to this particular framework wouldn't be spoon feeding me in the slightest; it would help to clarify the cases where QT is better than the alternatives.

You may want to re-consider that pitch. This type of hostile and response won't attract people to QT.
gerbick's Avatar
Posts: 6,664 | Thanked: 14,982 times | Joined on Jul 2007 @ undecided.
It was stated earlier; however the whole "more" or "less" open; I'm all about community support and ongoing support.

Maemo, basically dying. MeeGo, basically silent on handsets.

Fix the fact that MeeGo is like still 2/3rds open, Maemo even less (implicit reasoning since MeeGo was supposed to be more open than Maemo) by that report and we'll talk.

Being more or less open doesn't mean jack if it's not still an active, ongoing project with varied projects. And Qt isn't that complex; it's just way different than a few languages I already use.

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to gerbick For This Useful Post:

open source, openness

Thread Tools

Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 11:30.